A client has requested I review materials selected by another Consultant no longer working on the project. These are interior finish products which I reviewed along with the Architect and Owner’s Representative, some products received a thumbs up, some a thumbs down and were eliminated from the project. The Architect would like me to issue a “formal document” advising that the materials are safe to use according to industry standards. I am not comfortable with providing any document that declares a product is safe. Any suggestions?
Jerome, I agree with your concern about making a statement about product safety. One approach might be to look at the product data to see whether they have been certified according to any of the “green” testing protocols, such as Greenguard, CRI Green Label Plus, Cradle-to-Cradle, etc. and make a list of which products have which certifications. These certifications do not prove that a product is “safe” but they indicate that some level of evaluation or testing has been done to evaluate potential toxic ingredients. When you submit the list of products/certifications, you don’t need to use the word “safe”, just offer references where the client can read more about what the certifications mean.
Greta, this is a Condominium, there is no Green Building Criteria.
Good suggestion though.
Do you have a contractual obligation to make such a statement?
Suggest that you provide the information you have and defer to the project architect. Ask them to define safe.
The “safe” word/request came from the Project Architect.
Mark, the question could pertain to any project, as Specifiers, are we selecting products that are safe for the user?
Actually, I do not select products, contractually the selection of products is the responsibility of the Architect.
Most products that are covered by industry standards are “safe to use” when used according to industry standards.
However,
- Many products are not covered by standards.
- Most standards cover things that do not affect safety (such as colorfastness).
- Most safety failures are not due to product issues but to their incorrect use in building systems and assemblies.
- Many of the products you specify are according to reference standards; the contractor is picking actual products. You should not take responsibility for that.
My professional liability insurer recommended I add the following to my agreements, which I did:
“Certifications: RLGA shall not be required to sign any documents, no matter by whom requested, that would result in RLGAs having to certify, guaranty, or warrant the existence of conditions that RLGA cannot ascertain.”
I too am wondering what the word “safe” means. Slip resistant? Fireproof? Structurally sound? Bulletproof? Low or no VOC’s? No Red List materials? Fit for human consumption?
What happens if you do the research on the building products and find that some of the products are not “safe”?
Taking responsibility (and liability) for another person’s selections sounds like a really bad idea.
The Architect has withdrawn the word “safe”, unfortunately this is a condo, so at some point the Condo Vultures will ask.
Well at least we have no Chinese Drywall, Chinese Porcelain yes.
Safe is a relative term.
Safe against what hazards?
What is an acceptable failure rate? 0 is not an acceptable answer.
How will you measure failure?
About the only thing I can think of that can be done here (short of saying “no”) is to ask them what standard(s) they want to conform to, and then check to see if they meet that. Probably, they have no idea what standard would apply. I had a project years ago (before current thinking on indoor air quality existed) where the public client was very worried about it. They hired an industrial hygienist to review all submittals. Maybe they can go that route.